NYRaider Posted January 26, 2023 Share Posted January 26, 2023 1 minute ago, incognito_man said: The Buccaneers did not trade for Brady... They didn't but they still paid a lot for a known commodity instead of going with a young guy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYRaider Posted January 26, 2023 Share Posted January 26, 2023 On 1/20/2023 at 8:49 AM, MWil23 said: ...then you throw in the Bills and Dolphins being in the same division, and does anyone say that they're anything other than 3rd at best with that weapons situation? I think you can make a case that they have better weapons than the Bills, especially if you're projecting into next season. Wilson is a stud, Breece is a stud, and Moore has flashed in the past. The Bills weapons are pretty underwhelming outside of Diggs, imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted January 26, 2023 Share Posted January 26, 2023 (edited) 3 minutes ago, NYRaider said: They didn't but they still paid a lot for a known commodity instead of going with a young guy. They paid nothing for him. They literally didn't give up any draft capital to acquire the GOAT. That is the furthest thing ever from a counterexample to my point. It's perhaps one of the best possible examples to prove my point... GOAT QBs are like never ever free agents. But if they are AND they're motivated to join your team, uh yeah...that's a GREAT spot to be in. Edited January 26, 2023 by incognito_man 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYRaider Posted January 26, 2023 Share Posted January 26, 2023 On 1/20/2023 at 8:01 AM, MWil23 said: I think it depends on who the Jets have to give up on the back end. If it's Wilson, Sauce, etc. then no, it will absolutely not. Lamar will have a good running game, subpar weapons, and a decent running back with a worse defense than he does now. If they're able to keep the roster intact and trade a cache of draft picks, then sure, they'd be contenders. If the Ravens tag and trade Lamar they can only take back draft picks, not players, so they'd be keeping their core intact. The Jets were 4th in scoring defense/yards allowed and the Ravens were 3rd in scoring defense/9th in yards allowed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYRaider Posted January 26, 2023 Share Posted January 26, 2023 1 minute ago, incognito_man said: They paid nothing for him. They literally didn't give up any draft capital to acquire the GOAT. That is the furthest thing ever from a counterexample to my point. It's perhaps one of the best possible examples to prove my point... GOAT QBs are like never ever free agents. But if they are AND they're motivated to join your team, uh yeah...that's a GREAT spot to be in. So your point is that trading up to draft someone provides significantly better value than trading for a veteran. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adamq Posted January 26, 2023 Share Posted January 26, 2023 9 minutes ago, NYRaider said: Trading up to #1 costs so much that it also hinders your ability to build a team. The Rams and Buccaneers both took the opposite approach and were able to win a Super Bowl. 49ers spent a little over 3 1sts on #3 overall, it would take more than that plus the massive contract to get a guy like Lamar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYRaider Posted January 26, 2023 Share Posted January 26, 2023 2 minutes ago, adamq said: 49ers spent a little over 3 1sts on #3 overall, it would take more than that plus the massive contract to get a guy like Lamar The 49ers gave up the 12th pick, 2022 1st, 2023 1st, and a 2022 3rd to move up for Lance. The Browns gave up a 2022 1st, 2023 1st, 2024 1st, 2023 3rd, and 2024 4th for Watson. It's really a pick your poison, you either have to give up the draft picks and hand out a big deal. Or you take a major risk on a rookie and hope that he pans out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted January 26, 2023 Share Posted January 26, 2023 2 minutes ago, NYRaider said: So your point is that trading up to draft someone provides significantly better value than trading for a veteran. Yes. The overall value. Team building is draft capital + salary cap for vets. Sacrificing both is bad business IMO. Sacrificing one is often necessary. Sacrificing neither often means your team REALLY sucked (Burrow/Bengals) and functions as the league intends to promote parity. The business side often means owners make more money if they have a stud QB (even if it's not the best football field decision). But it seems pretty clear to me the best football decision is NEVER to trade away loads of picks for a guy you're gonna break the bank on. Looks like a surefire way to not seriously compete for years. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted January 26, 2023 Share Posted January 26, 2023 2 minutes ago, NYRaider said: So your point is that trading up to draft someone provides significantly better value than trading for a veteran. Yes. The overall value. Team building is draft capital + salary cap for vets. Sacrificing both is bad business IMO. Sacrificing one is often necessary. Sacrificing neither often means your team REALLY sucked (Burrow/Bengals) and functions as the league intends to promote parity. The business side often means owners make more money if they have a stud QB (even if it's not the best football field decision). But it seems pretty clear to me the best football decision is NEVER to trade away loads of picks for a guy you're gonna break the bank on. Looks like a surefire way to not seriously compete for years. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.